Today, Council is discussing a arena-related items in the meeting, as well as a few other things. And we’re here, giving you up-to-the date info. So, keep an eye on this page, we’ll be updating it throughout the meeting.

Also, it’s our first live blog. So be gentle. I’ll be taking on the blog duties, while Mike Otto will be covering the social media side of things with our @thecharrette Twitter account.

9:34 – Things get started by a prayer from a priest from the Hindu Society of Alberta.

9:43 – Councillor Iveson asks some questions on what kind of systems are in place during an unplanned LRT delay. After coming in late. Coincidence? He’s curious on if trains are switched around and if announcements are made.

Arena Update (Here’s the update the administration is presenting to Council. Follow along at home! It’s a PDF.)

9:45 – Getting started on the arena talk, how it relates to the downtown plan.

-Administration says revitalization is helped along by “catalyst projects,” which often is a mix of private investment and public infrastructure.

-Considers the arena/entertainment district to be one of those catalyst projects. Lists the Leg ground update and work at the downtown post-secondary campuses as other examples.

9:49 – Administration estimates that with the use of a CRL, they could pay for 160 million of infrastructure funding over the next 20 years.

Argue that after the initial $125 million that the city could put in to the arena is paid off, the CRL will continue bringing in money for other city initiatives.

Administration hasn’t set what they think the boundaries of the CRL area should be – plan to have that ready for April 6.

9:54 – Iveson asks how the suggestion of a foundation to run the arena is different than how Northlands deals with Rexall now.

-Administration says Northlands helps operate the arena now. The proposed foundation wouldn’t be involved in the running the new arena. Instead, it would be more of a liaison between the operators of the facility (like the Katz group) and Council. Could run with 5-6 people, some of who might have worked with Northlands.

Iveson says there isn’t enough detail in the reports Council has seen on how the foundation would be set up. He says if it’s not done carefully, the foundation could become too cozy with whoever is running the arena. Wants assurances to keep it impartial and working for the public interest.

Says he wants these things in place to exceed the life of a new arena for the next time “we get shaken down.”

10:01 – Henderson curious on the need for such a foundation – says it’s more complex, and wouldn’t Council be that impartial body? Says the examples given in arena report don’t fit exactly with Edmonton’s situation.

He also says the examples of other cities with new arena districts involve downtowns that were deteriorating. He says that’s not the case in Edmonton. “We’ve turned a corner in the last ten years.” Wants more information on what arena districts do to downtowns that are growing.

-Administration says foundation is used with other facilities, like the Telus World of Science. Say they’ll try to get more info on growing downtowns and the effects of arena districts.

10:05 – Loken wants clarification on the cost and and CRL payment. Says a lot of misinformation out there on Twitter. I blame Mike Otto.

Administration says borrowing $125 million would end up costing $192 million over 20 years when interest is factored in.

10:08 – Liebovici wants more info on the Community Benefit Agreement – what kind of benefits would people living in the area have with the district, and kind of access would they have. Says “revitalization is not just a building.”

-Administration says they’ve given some info on the CBA. But a lot of it is involved in the negotiations with the Katz group, which is ongoing. So hard to say.

10:11 – Sloan asks what a lot of people are asking. “Is it a forgone conclusion that this arena is going to be built?” It seems like this report is geared towards only info on what will happen when this will be built.

Farbrother: No, it’s not. Administration just wants to make sure Council has all the info on all of the options.

Sloan says her farm upbringing means she can see when something is being corralled. Says it seems that “Council is being corralled with these reports” towards building a new arena. Says she’s not comfortable with the impartiality of the debate, and wants to revitalization to be the priority, not just an arena.

10:18 – City CFO Rosen says not all the info will be in the April 6 report. City is getting independent financial advice from a private company, which may take a little while.

Gibbons questions on whether Edmonton’s downtown is really on it’s way up already.

Administration says there are still parts of Edmonton’s downtown that takes a lot of work. But it’s difficult to compare to other cities – all downtowns are not the same. Need to look not only at downtown now, but downtown over the next 25-30 years.

10:22 – Krushell wants to know if we’re doing anything with naming rights. Also, any movement on the idea of dipping in to the federal P3 Canada fund, like Regina is trying to do for a new stadium?

Administration says naming rights are part of the negotiation. As for the P3 fund, sports stadiums are prohibited under its rules, but there’s pressure from other cities. No changes yet, but something they’re watching.

10:28 – Diotte: Anyone know if the Oilers are making money? Seems to be a lot of speculation out there on that. It would be good to know, if we’re making a deal.

Farbrother: That’s not something that we know at the moment. But it’s something important to know as we go forward to this. That info might be part of the independent financial analysis mentioned earlier.

Diotte wants to know how Administration can estimate the money the CRL would bring in before they’ve even set the borders for the CRL

Administration says they’ve done some basic estimates, using a pretty conservative CRL boundary. But not set in stom

10:34 – Sohi says he’s hearing from a lot of people who seem to think that the arena is absolutely going ahead.

Administration says they are trying to make it clear in communications material that it’s still an open decision, nothing has been set in stone yet.

10:42 – Starting a Arena Update Drinking Game. Take a shot when someone says “revenue stream.” We’ll all be dead by 11:30.

10:43 – DRINK!

10:48 – Caterina points out that the only cost isn’t in to the construction of the arena. Wants to know how much the city will have to pay for infrastructure costs AROUND the arena: roads, lights and such. A smattering of applause from the house seats.

Administration says they’re working out the costs on that, and they expect most/all of it will also come out of the CRL.

10:50 – Anderson points out that the City is responsible for the upkeep of Rexall. How much will that cost?

Administration: About 30 million over the next 10 years.

10:55 – Minor spat. Anderson says Council has made many directions to administration showing support for a downtown arena, he cites the vote to approve rezoning an entrainment district. Iveson says they are different issues, and you can’t interpret that as full support for an arena. Cross-talk.

10:59 – Second round of questions approved. Good thing I spent all those hours playing Mavis Beacon as a kid. Fingers, don’t fail me now!

11:02 – Iveson on voting to receive reports in to information. “I found the information in the first and third reports useful. I found the information in the second report ridiculous.”

And of course, you can find those reports on the meeting agenda here.

11:07 – Henderson throws some red meat to us urban design bloggers: how do we make sure that if we approve this, how will it be OUR arena. How are we going to pick the architects and what the design will be like. Because the city and the operators will probably want different things in design. “I want us to be building our building with Mr. Katz’s help, instead of him building his with our help.”

Administration: we might get more in to that later on. (I think he means in the in-camera discussions.)

11:11 – Sloan: What about risks? If we can’t land federal/provincial money or if construction costs rise, will we be on the hook for more than $125 million.

Administration: Risk management is part of the negotiations that we’re doing. Can give more info in the private information to Council.

Administration says that the CRL won’t mean higher taxes on the businesses in the CRL area. It’s just that money will be earmarked for the arena cost, not to the city’s general income pool. Now, if property values raise because of the arena, that will cover some of it. But really, it seems like there is bit of a shell game aspect: at least part of that CRL money will be coming from taxes the city would have gotten anyway. Not sure that is being communicated.

11:24 – Caterina is miffed, saying that Administration expects Council to make a decision in April, but isn’t given them all the information they need.

There does seem to be a lot of questions that are met with answers of more information later.

11:26 – Diotte reads an email that compares the proposed arena deal to two people buying a house together and suggests it would make a poor deal.

My take: wherever you stand on the arena debate, I think most of us agree that a private business deal and a public project are inherently different. They have different goals, different risks, different mechanisms. Not the same thing.

11:29 – Pittsburgh Penguins had a deal when they made their stadium that dealt with what happens if there are cost overruns. Are we talking about the same kind of thing in our negotiations?

Farbrother: We’ll talk about that in camera. (So basically, that means “yes.”)

11:32 – On revitalization: Mandel says he takes issue with the idea that Rexall Place revitalized 118th ave. It’s been there for 40 years with no change. “I think it was this Council that put the money and time in to that.” Doesn’t thing Rexall had all that much of an impact on cleaning up the area.

11:34 – Caterina says no one is arguing Rexall revitalized the area. But it, and NAIT, are important parts of the community.

But, he adds that “if hockey hasn’t rejuvenated that area over the last 30 years, what makes us think it will do it [downtown]?”

11:38 – Motion to move things in to private. Passes.

11:48 – During the break, Mike discovers the city has two Jr. planner jobs available. We are, of course, utterly unqualified for them.

That seems to be about it when it comes to the arena. So, Mike and I are off to the pub for a nip. We might be back to Council this afternoon, but doubt there will be any more live-blogging for today. But if you want more arena goodness, we have made some posts on the funding question in the past. Check out my post on opportunity costs or Mike’s argument that an arena won’t fix everything.

Thanks for all your comments and tweets! And if you have any suggestions on how we can make the next live-blog better, leave a comment below!

Signing off from City Hall.